United States District Court, D. Colorado
ORDER
PHILIP
A. BRIMMER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This
matter comes before the Court on defendant Melvin Roshard
Alfred's Motion for Revocation of Detention Order [Docket
No. 17], wherein the defendant asks the Court to review the
detention order and release Mr. Alfred on conditions. The
United States has filed a response [Docket No. 24].
The
defendant was arrested on September 17, 2018 in the Southern
District of Texas based on the criminal complaint in this
case alleging that the defendant violated 18 U.S.C. §
2422(a). On September 20, 2018, the defendant had a detention
hearing in front of Magistrate Judge Peter Bray. See
Docket No. 17-1. After a hearing at which the defendant was
represented by counsel and at which FBI Special Agent Robert
Spivey and Jeanette Alfred Andrews (the defendant's
mother) testified, Judge Bray found that the United States
had shown by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant
was a danger to the community and found by a preponderance of
the evidence that the defendant was a flight risk. Docket No.
7 at 34.
Defendant
seeks revocation of the magistrate judge's detention
order under 18 U.S.C. § 3145(b) on the grounds that the
United States failed to prove by clear and convincing
evidence that the defendant is a danger to the community and
that he poses a risk of non-appearance. Docket No. 17 at 1.
Requirements
for Detention Under the Bail Reform Act
Under
the Bail Reform Act, a defendant may be detained pending
trial only if a judicial officer finds “that no
condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure
the appearance of the person as required and the safety of
any other person and the community.” 18 U.S.C. §
3142(e). The government bears the burden of proof at a
detention hearing. Id. The government must prove
risk of flight by a preponderance of the evidence and must
prove dangerousness to any person or to the community by
clear and convincing evidence. 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f).
In
deciding whether there are conditions of release that would
assure the appearance of the defendant and the safety of the
community, the magistrate judge must consider the following
factors:
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged,
including whether the offense is a crime of violence, a
violation of section 1591, a Federal crime of terrorism, or
involves a minor victim or a controlled substance, firearm,
explosive, or destructive device;
(2) the weight of the evidence against the person;
(3) the history and characteristics of the person, including
--
(A) the person's character, physical and mental
condition, family ties, employment, financial resources,
length of residence in the community, community ties, past
conduct, history relating to drug or alcohol abuse, criminal
history, and record concerning appearance at court
proceedings; and
(B) whether, at the time of the current offense or arrest,
the person was on probation, on parole, or on other release
pending trial, sentencing, appeal, or completion of sentence
for an offense under Federal, State, or local law; and
(4) the nature and seriousness of the danger to any person or
the community that would be posed by the person's
release.
The
standard for the district court's review of a magistrate
judge's detention order under Section 3145(a) is de novo.
United States v. ...